| CVE |
Vendors |
Products |
Updated |
CVSS v3.1 |
| IBM Langflow OSS 1.0.0 through 1.12.3 could allow a remote attacker who could reach the message broker to execute arbitrary code on the system due to the deserialization of untrusted data. |
| Skuul School Management System through version 2.6.5 is vulnerable to incorrect access control in the ResultChecker::checkResult method. An authenticated student can manipulate the studentId parameter to retrieve another student's examination results, including examination marks, without authorization. |
| OPNsense core 26.1.6 through 26.7.7 contains an authentication bypass vulnerability in the captive portal roaming feature that lets unauthenticated attackers hijack authorized client sessions by spoofing unauthenticated MAC-to-IP observations. Attackers on the same Layer-2 segment can send forged gratuitous ARP replies binding their IP to a victim's MAC, gaining portal access with traffic attributed to the victim. |
| Dell OpenManage Enterprise, versions prior to 4.8.0, contains an Improper Neutralization of Special Elements in Output Used by a Downstream Component ('Injection') vulnerability. A high privileged attacker with adjacent network access could potentially exploit this vulnerability, leading to Script injection. |
| IBM Langflow OSS 1.0.0 through 1.12.3 could allow a remote authenticated attacker to execute arbitrary code due to improper neutralization of special elements used in an OS command. |
| IBM Langflow OSS 1.0.0 through 1.12.3 is vulnerable to server-side request forgery (SSRF). This may allow an authenticated attacker to send unauthorized requests from the system, potentially leading to network enumeration or facilitating other attacks. |
| IBM Langflow OSS 1.0.0 through 1.12.3 could allow a remote attacker to execute arbitrary code due to improper neutralization of special elements used in an OS command. |
| IBM Langflow OSS 1.0.0 through 1.12.4 could allow a remote authenticated attacker to execute arbitrary code due to improper neutralization of special elements used in an OS command. |
| IBM Langflow OSS 1.0.0 through 1.12.4 could allow a remote authenticated attacker to execute arbitrary code due to missing authorization. |
| IBM Langflow OSS 1.0.0 through 1.12.4 could allow a remote authenticated attacker to execute arbitrary code due to improper neutralization of code in eval/exec. |
| IBM Langflow OSS 1.0.0 through 1.12.4 could allow a remote authenticated attacker to execute arbitrary code due to improper control of code generation. |
| IBM Langflow OSS 1.0.0 through 1.12.8 could allow a remote attacker to execute arbitrary code due to improper control of code generation. |
| IBM Langflow OSS 1.0.0 through 1.12.4 could allow an authenticated user to traverse directories on the system. An attacker could send a specially crafted URL request to view arbitrary files on the system. |
| IBM Langflow OSS 1.0.0 through 1.12.8 could allow a remote authenticated attacker to obtain sensitive information due to insufficiently protected credentials. |
| IBM Langflow OSS 1.0.0 through 1.12.8 could allow a remote attacker with a low-privileged authenticated account to cause the Agentic Assistant to generate or submit component code using these unblocked patterns, resulting in arbitrary operating system command execution on the server. |
| IBM Langflow OSS 1.0.0 through 1.12.4 could allow a remote attacker with a low-privileged authenticated account to bypass the administrator-only restriction and execute arbitrary code on the server by configuring a built-in code-execution component with attacker-supplied inputs. |
| IBM Langflow OSS 1.0.0 through 1.12.4 could allow a remote authenticated attacker to obtain sensitive information due to cleartext storage of sensitive information. |
| IBM Langflow OSS 1.0.0 through 1.12.4 could allow a remote authenticated attacker to obtain sensitive information due to improper limitation of a pathname to a restricted directory. |
| IBM Langflow OSS 1.0.0 through 1.12.4 could allow a remote attacker to obtain sensitive information due to improper authentication. |
| Adobe Experience Manager is affected by a DOM-based Cross-Site Scripting (XSS) vulnerability. An attacker could exploit this issue by manipulating the DOM environment to execute malicious JavaScript within the context of the victim's browser. Exploitation of this issue requires user interaction in that a victim must visit a crafted webpage. Scope is changed. |
